Maestro D's Gang

It's just a matter of who's got leadership skills, and who needs to manipulate or bribe or threaten people to do what they need done.

Which doesn't make any sense because Pack Alpha specifically says, "when you try to impose your will" which is basically "threatening people or manipulating people".

Here's an interesting little tidbit on page 169 in the gang's harm and healing rules. It seems to imply that, yes, if you are a leader of a gang (whether you have the move or not) you can use leadership and/or pack alpha. The only requirement is that you be a "PC".

If the gang’s leader is a PC, she can hold the gang together with leadership or by imposing her will on it as its pack alpha.

Like is this really confusing or quibbling over word choice?

There's clearly a mechanical difference between a "crew" and a "gang". In nearly every example in the Apocalypse World document, a gang comes with an ability to lead them, such as leadership or pack alpha (do a text search of the words 'get a gang' in the PDF, you'll see what I mean). Crews do not.

That sets a precedent. The only time a PC earns a gang and doesn't have one of those moves is the separate document for the Maestro D' - and additionally, if you try to control a gang after gaining one descriptively somehow.

Even in the "gangs" section it says:

A couple of the characters can get a new gang, plus either pack alpha or leadership, as one of their improvements. *bold emphasis mine

So, clearly the abilities and actual gang are related.

I've not played with the Maestro D yet, but isn't it simply a matter of what conflicts we expect to be interesting?

The Operator is all about balancing the conflicting demands of the project she's running. If her crew are guarding a bar then they're not raking the wastelands for salvage or keeping her boy toy away from the slavers. Juggling does this, of course it's on the sheet.

A Chopper is all about being the brutal enough to keep control of a pack of savage murderous thieves. If she gives an order to a gang, we're want to see whether or not she has to break her second's jaw to get him to pay attention. Pack alpha does this, of course it's on the sheet.

Now we might care whether or not a particular Maestro D can focus her staff, or keep them in line, or whatever. Especially when the PC-NPC triangles start emerging. But that's not the jumping off point of the concept, it can be handled with basic or custom moves as and when it's needed.

Now we might care whether or not a particular Maestro D can focus her staff, or keep them in line, or whatever. Especially when the PC-NPC triangles start emerging. But that's not the jumping off point of the concept, it can be handled with basic or custom moves as and when it's needed.

Which implies it should be a crew, not a gang.

You can have a gang without having either leadership or pack alpha, just like you can have a car without being a no shit driver or you can have violation gloves without having any brainer moves. I don't get the confusion.

You can have a gang without having either leadership or pack alpha, just like you can have a car without being a no shit driver or you can have violation gloves without having any brainer moves. I don't get the confusion.

I think the confusion is that, mechanically speaking, imposing your will on a gang is fundamentally different than imposing your will on an individual. When you Go Aggro for example, it's on "someone".

If you can have a gang without those abilities, why does every improvement that include a gang grant one of those abilities? What about leading a gang in battle? Can you just not "hold the gang together" like you can with leadership or pack alpha?

Fictionally speaking, it makes sense for someone with a gang to have an ability to exert their authority over the gang. With a crew, you only need to exert your authority over each individual in the crew.

It's very distinct from having a car or using a violation glove.

Make sense?

p.s. I'm not saying that it's impossible to play a gang leader without those moves, I'm just saying it seems like it's coded into the system's mechanics for a gang leader to have a move like leadership or pack alpha.

That's a funny, apt way to put it. Yes, it's coded into the game's rules for a gang's leader to have one of those moves.

It just means that gang leadership doesn't come naturally to the maestro d'. If she wants it, she has to spend an improvement to develop it. Meanwhile, she has a gang but she doesn't really lead it -- that's okay.

That's a funny, apt way to put it. Yes, it's coded into the game's rules for a gang's leader to have one of those moves.

It just means that gang leadership doesn't come naturally to the maestro d'. If she wants it, she has to spend an improvement to develop it. Meanwhile, she has a gang but she doesn't really lead it -- that's okay.

Does this also mean that the Maestro D' cannot hold a gang together if it takes harm?

According to the rules, a gang with no leader, which you are saying the Maestro D' isn't, won't hold together after taking 1-harm. Basically, a Maestro D's gang is leaderless.

I think the D's gang (assuming she hasn't taking an out-of-playbook move to get leadership or pack alpha) has a leader.  It's just not her.  She's employing a gang lead by one of the gangers.  They work for her but she's not, like, the gang leader.  ya know?

I think the D's gang (assuming she hasn't taking an out-of-playbook move to get leadership or pack alpha) has a leader.  It's just not her.  She's employing a gang lead by one of the gangers.  They work for her but she's not, like, the gang leader.  ya know?

Which makes sense to me, and why it's worded that way.

Then she doesn't "have a gang", she "has a gang in her employ that works security". Which, is a huge difference. It's not totally clear in the trifold description. But, this makes sense.

And, it also clarifies the situation a bit. Basically, you can't "have a gang" unless you are also "the leader" of said gang. Which means, you can't acquire a gang without said ability.

This begs the question, if you don't take "get a gang, and leadership or pack alpha" as an improvement, is it ever possible to become a leader of the gang - descriptively.

Can you ever become the leader of a gang in the fiction without taking it as an improvement?

This is getting into really weird nit-picking over semantics, and it confuses me.  Mostly I'm confused because usually it's ME that starts nit-picking over semantics, but in this case I'm just not bothered in the slightest by it.

I mean, I would say, sure you totally "have" a gang even if you aren't the leader.  It's like this, IMO:
In the game I'm currently running, there's an NPC hardholder.  There's also a group of ex-raiders that he hired a few years back to guard the holding.  They're his gang.  He "has" a gang. If he tells them to do something, they're probably going to do it.  But if stuff gets hairy, they'll listen to the leader over him, for sure.  It's like a military squad, maybe they've got a sergeant who handles the day to day shit, and they've also got some officer, too.  The officer, he's technically in charge, but really, what the hell does he know?  The sarge is the real leader.

I mean, I would say, sure you totally "have" a gang even if you aren't the leader.  It's like this, IMO:
In the game I'm currently running, there's an NPC hardholder.  There's also a group of ex-raiders that he hired a few years back to guard the holding.  They're his gang.  He "has" a gang. If he tells them to do something, they're probably going to do it.  But if stuff gets hairy, they'll listen to the leader over him, for sure.  It's like a military squad, maybe they've got a sergeant who handles the day to day shit, and they've also got some officer, too.  The officer, he's technically in charge, but really, what the hell does he know?  The sarge is the real leader.

That doesn't make any sense. You are either the leader of the gang or you're not and you're just bartering with them to do something. You can't actually exert your will on them (outside of Going Aggro, Manipulating or Bribing their leader...).

This is kind of a weird example, because Hardholders actually usually have a gang and leadership... This would have been his gang. He can use leadership on them right? If not. It's not his gang. It's a deal with a gang's leader.

Yah know?

It's like me hiring a Driver to run cargo for me. The car isn't mine because I hired the Driver...

You can Go Aggro, Manipulate, or bribe an entire group. You don't have to just do it to the leader. See my thread about it here.

You can Go Aggro, Manipulate, or bribe an entire group. You don't have to just do it to the leader. See my thread about it here.

Yeah. That's an interesting thread. Good stuff. Thanks for sharing.

Here's my problem: Sure, I can Go Aggro on a gang. But, guess what, they're going to do what the leader says unless it contradicts the gang's self-interest, as we've established earlier.

So, I hold my gun to the kitten's head and I say, "Gimme the gas or he gets it." Or, I walk up to the gang and I say, "Sure, you can kill me but one of you is going to die."

Then, immediately the leader looks at his gang and says, "Are you fucking kidding me? Rip this guy to shreds."

Ultimately, you need to Go Aggro on the gang leader right? A single individual in control of the others.

I walk up with the gang leader in my grasp, "Gimme the gas or I paint the walls with his brains..."

The gang hesitates for a moment, waiting for the nod from the boss. Right?

A crew on the other hand doesn't have a leader. They don't have anyone to look to. They are a group of individuals. It's different.

I don't know.

This has been good stuff and I think it's made me think a lot about how to handle gangs vs. crews in my hacks and games. Thanks for the feedback guys and gals.

The thing is, mechanically it doesn't matter either way. Whether you're going aggro on the whole gang or the leader if there is one is moot since it's still one roll.

The thing is, mechanically it doesn't matter either way. Whether you're going aggro on the whole gang or the leader if there is one is moot since it's still one roll.

But, fictionally it matters.

Right? If I Go Aggro on the gang, the leader can step in and say, "Fuck that. I'm the leader here."

If I Go Aggro on the leader, there's not much he can do. Aye?